Silver Spirit Nightmare. Do they care?

[Daveywavey70]

I really do not want to come off as a Silversea apologist. I love the product, but (as in any love affair) I am aware that the beloved may have blemishes. Heaven knows, I have had my issues with Silversea -- as I have with each of the luxury lines.

 

Is it reasonable to believe that a post-cruise complaint will have been dealt with within ten days? I believe that is the time between the end of the inaugural Spirit cruise and the launch of this thread. I would think that one would allow more than ten days before moving to the "final resort" of social media.

 

This wasn’t just a post cruise complaint. I was promised whilst on the Ship that I would be contacted within a couple of days of returning home. When that didn’t happen I contacted London Guest Relations. They promised that I would have their initial response within 48 hours. That didn’t happen. I Contacted them again and was promised again an initial response within 48 hours. That didn’t happen either. I Then called Silversea and was told the person that promised to contact me that day was out of the office all day.

 

That was when I decided to start this thread.

 

I’m really not interested in having a public bun fight but wish I would have known how poor SS Customer Services are before I booked with them.

 

There are others on here that had a very poor experience too, let alone however many others that don’t know about the site. If I were the only one affected then I can understand the sceptics believing i’m just out to bash SS but we have all been treated equally as appallingly.

[Daveywavey70]

That’s exactly what they did Jeff. I pleaded with them to give me another cabin. I told them it didn’t matter if it was a lesser grade of cabin I just wanted lights. They didn’t have a single spare cabin on the ship. When I asked Guest relations why they sold the cruise out their response was “we didn’t anticipate that there would be any problems.

[Capri73]

A LIE. There were 2 empty cabins on our floor.SS just lost the ball on this one and is still in denial.They could have easily given them one of these cabins have no clue why they did not.Both were handicap suites and I can attest to the the fact that they were empty.

[mrscrab]

:rolleyes:I often wonder why SS are so brilliant on board the vessel BUT are pretty useless when one needs to solve important problems on shore. I got no help at all with them when we had the "rest assured" programme and during the time waiting to sail my husband passed away and they refused to return his payment. My TA and the Australian office fought for this but to no avail. SS really need to up their game re ashore communications and realize that most of us are return passengers and should be recognised and treated as such.

I am on the Spirit to St Petersburg and a back to back London to New York so am hoping that "enough glue" was used for fittings both aboard and the join as we sail the North Atlantic mid September.

 

Keep at it Daveywavey, you can't let them beat you on this one!!

[Daveywavey70]

A LIE. There were 2 empty cabins on our floor.SS just lost the ball on this one and is still in denial.They could have easily given them one of these cabins have no clue why they did not.Both were handicap suites and I can attest to the the fact that they were empty.

 

So this whole sorry affair was avoidable? Why on earth would they do that? When I asked to be moved they insisted they hadn’t a cabin available anywhere on the ship.

I’m sorry to hear about your situation mrscrab. Did it ever get sorted?

[UKCruiseJeff]

Maybe Europe needs better consumer laws because European companies are different?

 

Hi,

 

EU consumer laws are based on UK consumer laws who were way ahead in the EU. EU consumer laws have nothing to do with EU companies "because they are different" as you suggest. They are imposed on every company that trades within the EU ie including US, Japanese, Oz companies because all companies who wish to operate and trade within the EU must comply with EU laws.

 

In a way they are particularly more pertinent to non-EU companies because it is those companies that are least experienced in offering proper consumer protection which all EU organisations have long been aware of and are use to complying with.

[drron29]

Well in the past another US hotel chain treated me well with a problem.

The 2 travel companies I have had problems with and made life hard are Accor and Silverseas.Both European hence my feeling European companies are different.

Others of course almost certainly have different experiences.

Fortunately with Accor it wasn't a huge amount and here in Oz we can do CC chargebacks.

With SS it was eventually resolved satisfactorily due to our TA.

[mrscrab]

No they just refused to return the monies paid for his fare using the Rest Assured programme. I did get the money returned from our travel insurance but there was a lot of ill feeling to say the least. When on board I have told everyone about this to be aware of the Rest Assured programme that it is not always as promised.

Keep batting on with this major episode, what you went through was enough to turn you against SS forever!!

[UKCruiseJeff]

Well in the past another US hotel chain treated me well with a problem.

The 2 travel companies I have had problems with and made life hard are Accor and Silverseas.Both European hence my feeling European companies are different.

Others of course almost certainly have different experiences.

Fortunately with Accor it wasn't a huge amount and here in Oz we can do CC chargebacks.

With SS it was eventually resolved satisfactorily due to our TA.

 

Hi Ron, you are quite right ... but they are I think different issues at play.

 

The hotel groups are particularly reliant on business customers who make the bulk of their revenue compared to leisure because business customers tend to be brand loyal presuming their loyalty scheme fits well and presuming they have excellent CS and that they sort out problems painlessly. So the hotel brands have competed more on customer service than say cruise lines whose customers tend to be more intermittent and transient. Many business customers spend a lot of their week in hotels and the scheme I use most and belong to has a minimum requirement of 80 nights or so for top tier membership and I simply enjoy legacy loyalty benefits. ie they still treat me as though I held top-tier. Most groups offer in varying ways no-quibble problem resolution when something is clearly wrong and all of them exceed legal requirement in any geographic and so the legal framework isn't relevant.

 

Sadly many other companies generally wherever they are based have staff who suffer from both internal pressures and a general lack of awareness of consumer rights within their country. It is common for customers to have to explain to companies what their legal obligations are. In fact many of our clients were HQ'ed in one country say Japan and had EU, US and Oz operations and it was part of our role to ensure that all parts understood their obligations wherever they operated even though they all used common CS processes. Part of my mission was to advise clients to compete on exceptional CS. You may recall (or not) from my posts some time back that SS were clients of ours some years ago at the invitation of the owner. But that was then and now is now.

 

Oz consumer laws are very good and are extremely similar to EU laws which in turn were based on UK laws. When you book with Silversea from Oz then even if you used the EU office they were still governed by your Oz protections as the contract is deemed to have been completed on your telephone or your computer and anyone offering services to Oz residents must comply with Oz law. As you know in Oz in different states there are different ways to access lower fast-track courts to pursue consumer issues that cannot be resolved without recourse to the law.

 

As a point of interest in very general terms the faster a company deals with a problem well, then the more likely that the customer will not only feel less angry and upset, but will actively feel a greater sense of loyalty and propensity to buy again and recommend the company to others than if he/she hadn't had the problem. They are often become brand ambassadors. It is because customers do not know how well a company will deal with a problem until they have a problem. However the longer it takes to resolve a problem and the worst it is handled the more likely a customer will have no further dealings with them and tell others to avoid the company as well. We did some research on this and found it to be factual. It costs an extraordinary amount of money to offer poor CS but sadly too many managements seem to lack good leadership and vision and or are perhaps too dumb it seems to grasp this. Excellent CS is extremely cost-effective. Somewhere along that time line is a tipping point which I have yet to locate accurately.

 

So in summary, what effects good CS with hotel groups is very clear commercial pressure largely from a highly competitive market place used prominently by repeat business users whereas cruise lines do not yet seem to feel that they need to have the same levels of CS. In each country most providers maintain a convenient lack of awareness about their minimum legal obligations until the issue is forced.

[KmomChicago]

Thanks for your reassurances Unibok... I better get myself a lump of salt too!

 

 

 

I agree with her comments. We are budget cruisers and at this point in our lives it’s inconceivable to sail a luxury line. But the same range of comments appear for almost any ship in any class. The oldest, rode hard mass market ships get similar pro and con observations as these super fancies.

 

A lot of people I think are either accustomed to true perfection in life, are bad travelers who are just more comfortable at home, or see things from a pessimistic viewpoint.

 

All valid but maybe you are a different type of traveler. Intrepid folks who can sleep sitting up on a hot school bus and think any landing is a good one if you can walk away from it, find some perverse excitement in the surprising mishaps of each journey.

 

Not that anyone should expect failure from a $500+ per day experience but some folks are just hardly bothered by anything and others are the princess and the pea. Grain of salt, chunk of salt, are there boulders of salt?

 

Enjoy your fancy pants cruise. Jealous in a good natured way of all of you!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Daveywavey70]

Well the response has arrived from Peter Shanks.

Lots of apologies but they will not offer anything other than a future cruise credit to any of their guests in any market.

As stated before, after the experience I’ve had, that voucher will never be used.

 

The best part of the email was as follows.

When the ship left the shipyard we were unaware of the electrical issues that then became apparent on the ship when working as a full ship. It was these electrical issues that caused the majority of problems on board. It was certainly not a result of cutting any corners on the $70m refit and we would never risk treating our guests as ‘Guinea Pigs’.

 

Well i’m Sorry but if you fail to test things adequately and sort those problems out before the passengers board, what are those passengers other than Guinea Pigs? Most other lines after a project like this would have invited T.A.s onto the ship to test it for a couple of days. They would have made willing Guineas Pigs.

[UKCruiseJeff]

Hi Dave,

 

I'm really sorry to hear this and you have my thoughts and sympathies.

 

It sounds to me like this inflexible approach is something that has been mandated to him by up the line from HQ in order to "hold the line" across all markets. They said as much before when their interpretation of fairness was to treat all customers identically irrespective of the different experiences each had and impose on them a settlement regardless and without any discussion. They have in fact imposed on you a "class remedy" as though you were a part of a class action. In their view this it seems is fairer than treating all of their customers as individuals. Imposing on you a further purchase in order to be compensated is clearly in their view fair. It clearly fails to understand that they are subject to the different laws and consumer regulations that apply in the different markets in which they operate. This is probably a safe route for them legally in the US but is probably extremely unwise in the EU.

 

You have clearly not received the cruise you purchased and the correct approach would be to offer some sort of refund. A refund voucher compels you to buy more of the product that you have quite understandably lost confidence in. In fact the voucher increases your under-mined confidence. What they are now doing is attempting to make a further higher profit from you in future to compensate themselves for the breach of contract and disappointment that you suffered. I am surprised that they seem unable to see the unfairness of this and indefensible situation it legally probably places them in.

 

We can debate the amount that refund should be but currently you have been offered no refund at all and have been told that that is the end of the story and they have compounded that position when your email was blacklisted. That is very clearly wrong and perversely taking such an extremely unreasonable and inflexible and intransigent stance has in fact strengthened your legal risk should you decide to take the only route apparently left open to you ie court action. In your situation I would have absolutely no hesitation in starting along that route because I believe that once they take UK legal advice they will wish to avoid this reaching court. Allowing this to reach court will crystallise a "regular" problem and preferred remedy that they would not wish to be crystallised. They will probably eventually make you an offer and ask you to agree a figure and sign a NDA, something I personally have never agreed to.

 

Good luck and as before happy to offer sympathy and support - with a preference to move to the Cooler in order to avoid pointless arguments and debates with others who seek to defend SS and will choose to disagree with you if you decide to pursue this.

[Capri73]

Also the 25% is for what you paid on this cruise.So if you had credits,or early booking discounts that will all be deducted if you choose another trip.

Anyone in a lower category who had issues the credit is less than those in a higher cabin.

[hypercafe]

I think the more the op puts their negotiation with SS on the net the less likely they will be to be treated as a individual. They have many passangers from many places that seem to be covered by different laws. All passengers got the 25% FCC, if the rest of them see the op got say 125% cash refund the other 600 will want the same so SS will never agree in public to a unequal settlement. I am sure they read the posts here so if I was the op I would sign off. I wish them success in whatever legal system that applies to them.

 

Sent from my SM-T320 using Forums mobile app

[descartes1]

Yes we were offered a 25% discount against a future cruise. The same 25% as the people that were not inconvenienced in any way at all.

 

Considering that this was my first holiday in over 10 years and we wern't told when we booked about the stretch.

 

Considering that as soon as I found out about the stretch and called Silversea and we were reassured that the ship wouldn't sail if she wasn't perfect.

 

Considering that we had no lights in our bathroom, closet or passageway for the first 3 days.

 

Considering that it took 2 days to even get a flashlight in order to use our bathroom (The batteries ran out after 5 minutes).

 

Considering that we had no phone to report problems, no tv and no safe.

 

Considering that it took 18 hours each time to send an electrician.

 

Considering that we were given 2 led tealights to shave by.

 

Considering that our 4th day was completely messed up due to incompetence with the tenders.

 

Considering that our 2 spa appointments were completely messed up and we were then overcharged for both, one by over $100.

 

Considering we couldn't get any answers to when our problems would be solved.

 

Considering that Guest Relations Shoreside is even worse than onboard.

 

Do you really believe that I'll be using that voucher any time soon?

 

My God, this is outrageous.

 

After being loyal patrons and defenders of Silversea for years (see my other posts on this forum), we had a disastrous experience which included being served by an intoxicated waitress at dinner, then separately, a female in our party being the object of a sexual comment by a staff member, and many, many other issues (mostly all service related).

 

We were offered a credit on a future voyage which roughly amounted to the same 25% being offered in this instance. We did not use this credit. (There are too many other great alternatives in the luxury cruise space that are truly committed to a luxury experience and their customers' satisfaction). Being offered a few thousand dollars on a future voyage does not make up for a ruined cruise during a summer vacation costing something like $25,000+, all in.

 

I never thought I'd say this, but I think your experience was worse than ours.

[les37b]

Well the response has arrived from Peter Shanks.

Lots of apologies but they will not offer anything other than a future cruise credit to any of their guests in any market.

As stated before, after the experience I’ve had, that voucher will never be used.

 

The best part of the email was as follows.

When the ship left the shipyard we were unaware of the electrical issues that then became apparent on the ship when working as a full ship. It was these electrical issues that caused the majority of problems on board. It was certainly not a result of cutting any corners on the $70m refit and we would never risk treating our guests as ‘Guinea Pigs’.

 

Well i’m Sorry but if you fail to test things adequately and sort those problems out before the passengers board, what are those passengers other than Guinea Pigs? Most other lines after a project like this would have invited T.A.s onto the ship to test it for a couple of days. They would have made willing Guineas Pigs.

 

I really don't get how they can think giving everyone (regardless of whether affected or not) the same "compensation" is a solution that would be acceptable - particularly since you've said you wont be using SS again so effectively you've got nothing.

 

That's not compensation in my eyes. Just an incentive to sail with SS again which amounts to zero..

 

Good luck with whatever route you take and do please keep us informed in your thread.

[Bill B]

What they are now doing is attempting to make a further higher profit from you in future to compensate themselves for the breach of contract and disappointment that you suffered.

 

I'm keeping my fingers crossed before and during my (probably) only Silver Sea voyage - to ward off ending up in 'opposite land' should any problems arise. :rolleyes:

[meow!]

A more fundamental question is why do they want to stretch the "Spirit". It is already a working ship, just refurbish, and perhaps remove some seats from the theatre to make the remaining seats more tolerable.

[tgh]

UKC_J certainly has finger on it ….(SS pulse)… good corporate insight.

We also had a cruise outcome "discussion" and also received a generic "settlement".

In any jurisdiction it is a massive commitment , fraught with risk, to take on a corporate behemoth.

The 'moths know this and feel warm in their cocoons as very few wasps have sufficient angst to proceed.

The real world risks in legal action make it untenable for all but the most angry of wasps .

[les37b]

A more fundamental question is why do they want to stretch the "Spirit". It is already a working ship, just refurbish, and perhaps remove some seats from the theatre to make the remaining seats more tolerable.

 

 

To Musify... and make more $$$ for the extra capacity, but that said, to re-coup that level of investment will take an awful long time. In short like you, I don't think it makes too much sense at all.

 

Hopefully I will be impressed and have a change of heartwhen I see first hand.

[drron29]

I just remembered a similar problem with the Silver Explorer after it's major refurb.Took so long due to my medical condition-CRAFT.

But here are 2 posts on how they dealt with that.

https://boards.cruisecritic.com.au/showpost.php?p=53163825&postcount=31

https://boards.cruisecritic.com.au/showpost.php?p=53166864&postcount=38

 

So the last offer noted was a future cruise discount + a refund of half cruise cost.

So not true that SS don't offer financial compensation.

Mind you it is typical of SS to deny what they actually do.We were told on the last cruise that they never offer free upgrades.Yet met 2 couples on board who had been given a one class upgrade + $1000 OBC when booking less than 3 months out.

[les37b]

IYet met 2 couples on board who had been given a one class upgrade + $1000 OBC when booking less than 3 months out.

 

Isn't that a frequent offer used on cruises not selling well?

 

I certainly got both of those last year on the wind. Usually the price goes up when "bonus" offers kick in, but it hadn't on mine so was given then on part of the price warrenty

 

 

 

Sent from my Phone using Tapatalk

[Daveywavey70]

I wasn’t expecting anything like that Drron29. I hoped that they would either change the 25% future cruise credit to a 25% refund or increase the %age of future cruise credit as a gesture to acknowledge their shortcomings for the passengers worst affected and encourage us to give them a second chance. I’m not an unreasonable person. Instead they are unresponsive, unhelpful, defensive and intransient. It is the response from SS that has made this entire situation so much worse.

 

I Am left feeling that my very hard earned holiday that I had put a huge amount of planning into to make it the “holiday of a lifetime”( I used to cruise twice a year until I started my own business 10 years ago and haven’t had a day off since) was an absolute shambles and I think that This entire fiasco was avoidable. I Also feel that there are many opportunities that SS had to put it right but outstandingly failed to. I Have tried extremely hard to reach out to them only to be met with complete indifference.

 

I also feel really very disappointed because I really bought into the idea of cruising with a privately owned compny as opposed to an anonymous corporation with countless Monster Ships. I Really bought into that idea because i’m An independent hotelier myself (obviously my business is on an entirely different scale) that focuses so much on our guests. I mistakenly, and possibly naively, expected similar treatment, especially when SS bill themselves as “Ultra Luxury”.

 

I am left feeling more stressed and distressed from the entire episode than if I had not taken the holiday at all. I Also kick myself for not following my instincts and cancelling the cruise when I found out about the stretch and instead accepting their reassurance and guarantee that the ship wouldnt sail unless she was perfect.

 

Any attempt from SS to address my complaints would have helped aleviate this feeling but frankly I am left feeling that i’ve Been taken for a fool.

 

The response, or lack of it, has made a very bad situation much much worse and a situation that was easily redeemable with effective customer services has reached the point where it can now only be resolved by the courts.

 

On the positive side, I now have a team in place where we can cruise a couple of times a year again so we’re Looking at the options. Any thoughts on Azamara?

 

And finally, Trolls, people suffering from cruise envy and people that wish to unquestionably and immediately defend SS without knowing the full facts please consider the feelings of people that are extremely upset about the way that they have been treated before you post to this or similar posts in the future.

[drron29]

Isn't that a frequent offer used on cruises not selling well?

 

I certainly got both of those last year on the wind. Usually the price goes up when "bonus" offers kick in, but it hadn't on mine so was given then on part of the price warrenty

 

 

 

Sent from my Phone using Tapatalk

When the bonus offers came out we were told that the price had gone up so bad luck.I will be doing screen shots of the prices at time of booking from now on.

[les37b]

When the bonus offers came out we were told that the price had gone up so bad luck.I will be doing screen shots of the prices at time of booking from now on.

 

 

When these “bonus” offers come out, they do more often come with price increases meaning the “free gift” is anything but. If the increase is not too great, you do have the option to cancel and rebook.

 

On my last trip, the exact scenario you refer came up. Firstly a cat upgrade, which I was turned down, but was offered “a gesture of goodwill” to compensate and a 2 cat upgrade for an extra £250 each which we excepted.

 

Two months later, the $1000 bonus was also added. This time the price hadn’t changed, but the early booking bonus had expired meaning that the rebooking cost would be more. (Which is the measure that is used).

 

I did have a whinge saying that paying in full up front was no longer an incentive in that case and left it at that. When I got on board, I not only had the $500 Muse “compensation” OBC (over the reservation “issues” which was given to all regardless of any real problems - which for me was zero.) Additionally there was a further $200 which very much was an unexpected pleasant surprise.

 

The booking itself was “compensation” for my terminated Spirit cruise cancelled because of the stretch.

 

Overall, I can only state that I’ve personally been treated very well by SS and that my direct booking and good communications with the agent I always book through paid dividends.

 

On my cruise last year to the Caribbean paid in full a year out, both of those “bonus” were added without any change in price and I was given a 2 cat upgrade and $1000 OBC because the paying price was unchanged. It doesn’t happen often, but it does happen. I just got very very lucky and learned it was always a good idea to keep checking the prices.

 

My next 2 in the pipeline have no increases yet, but nothing added either.... yet!

 

All Im saying I guess is the “free upgrades” you’d mentioned were not as free as suggested and were paid for by a price increase. Give with one hand and take with the other. Like for like is the key here.

 

Anyway, not wanting to go off topic for the OP... but there is some relevance too. I was given the “$500 OBC” regardless of the fact I actually found the reservation system worked very well and had no problems. Others I know of did, yet had the same “offer” and to my knowledge nothing extra added. That compensation was gratefully received and did actually achieve its aim in getting a further booking so wasn’t entirely a wasted gesture on SS” part.

 

Daveywavy certainly has a genuine and justified reason to feel aggrieved and do think that SS has handled this badly by washing their hands of it by not acknowledging he does have a good reason to seek more that what everyone had been offered.

 

It does appear now that SS is digging in their heels and I do wonder if this thread may be the cause. Whatever, I do certainly agree he deserves more than has been offered, which effectively is zero. I truly hope there is a change of heart and the probable impending legal action which sounds likely now can be avoided. I do think SS will be the loser if it doesn’t accept what’s on the table is not adequate.

 

On the other issue I saw earlier about email addresses being blocked. I wouldn’t necessary suggest that is what has happened. I’ve similarly been “blocked” and it was just their IT system picking up my email address as a Spam host. (My real personal domain email address which I’ve used for over 20 years and posted online many many times has been harvested and used extensively to sell ****** and other dodgy things as the “sender”. .... that’s my excuse anyway! lol)

 

If nothing else, it is good practice if posting on a forum to use a throwaway email address. Mine is silversea@mail.co.uk ... I don’t care it that’s harvested... but do think it’s more likely to be why the problem has happened. My “real” email address no longer bounces with SS, but did have to communicate with a different one until it was sorted. Such a shame ... my “real” domain is such a cool one. Not many 3 letter domains around even back then when I bought it.

 

Anyway, I do hope you get resolution daveywavey and SS accepts your case is above and beyond. I do get the impression now from the latest reply though that this thread may have had a negative effect, even it it was only posted out of frustration from getting nowhere. The daft thing, if you do pursue in a court, I believe you will win your case and the outcome will be negative publicity and greater cost for them. A lose lose situation that SS appear to be prepared to take a gamble on.

 

On a brighter note.... I shall see first hand today if the lights are fixed yet! lol